Despite the extra fancy stuff that has been added to L4D2 and Portal 2, today's Source still looks so much the same as it did in 2001, in my opinion. That HDR stuff up there is way over the top, but I definitely wouldn't mind Source being given a major overhaul.

Despite the extra fancy stuff that has been added to L4D2 and Portal 2, today's Source still looks so much the same as it did in 2001, in my opinion. That HDR stuff up there is way over the top, but I definitely wouldn't mind Source being given a major overhaul.

2001 ?
So you pretty much mean:
I think you need glasses.
2012:

All source needs is some updated shaders (like phong / specular on brushes), a set of nice new high-er resolution textures, and some good art direction (Portal 2)

The more i think about it, the more it feels like CSGO is just an engine test for something a lot bigger.
/optimist

That would be kinda stupid after all the work they put in it.. But still.. CS:S was released just before HL2 and I saw CS:S as a graphics "show-off" so to say. I had HL2 in mind every time I played CS:S before the release of HL2. Didn't you? Or am I really that much of a fanboy?

Source CAN look dated because the content is so over-used, it gets bland (Trust me, I'm a mapper: I know)

Why don't you actually look at what the mappers in the mappers secton are doing with the engine before coming out with such a blanket statement.

My only grip with source is that the editor is bodged together with modules being tacked on rather than properly implemented. Otherwise, it is a solid engine that will run well on pretty much any computer, it has reasonable graphics, physics engine intergration that is alright (and certainly better than console physics).

Why don't you actually look at what the mappers in the mappers secton are doing with the engine before coming out with such a blanket statement.

My only grip with source is that the editor is bodged together with modules being tacked on rather than properly implemented. Otherwise, it is a solid engine that will run well on pretty much any computer, it has reasonable graphics, physics engine intergration that is alright (and certainly better than console physics).

source is an amazing engine, from the player point of view, but a horrible one in a developer point of view. You have to know A LOT to make something well in Source ( I have over 1200 hours using hammer, and still don't know that much ), meanwhile in cryengine a random guy who doesn't know anything about level design spams trees and bushes around a mountain and it looks good...

The problem about source is not the content, is how you make the content :/

So the gist is that Source mainly "just" needs to be streamlined after all its updates and otherwise it could, with some effort, be upscaled to meet contemporary "high end" standards? Did I deduce that correctly?

Gabe replied telling me it's the Big Picture UI which we already knew, but I guess this means the "no announcements" email is real

That's specious reasoning considering, while not used in any official capacity (as far as I'm aware, anyway), 10' UI has become synonymous with BPM. That is to say, it's just another shorthand term for "Valve's Steam interface intended for use from the couch."

Out of curiosity, why did you to inquire as to the veracity of 10' UI referring to BPM and not request confirmation that the increasingly-accepted e-mails of recent are in fact legit? On one hand, you could've hit two birds with one stone; however, responding to rumours isn't exactly Valve's forte, so, when desiring a reply, it does make sense to avoid such topics.

Why don't you actually look at what the mappers in the mappers secton are doing with the engine before coming out with such a blanket statement.

My only grip with source is that the editor is bodged together with modules being tacked on rather than properly implemented. Otherwise, it is a solid engine that will run well on pretty much any computer, it has reasonable graphics, physics engine intergration that is alright (and certainly better than console physics).

Wasn't trying to upset, but I DO spend quite a large time in the mapping section, you can check my profile on FP even, and I posted recently-ish in the texture mega-thread: And you can also check my portfolio on my website.

And it DOES look bland if people re-use content from source and older games: you have to get real creative to make it look fresh, a good example is F.Kalkman's maps.